On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:15:18 +0100, Boris Lenz wrote:
>On Fri, January 18, 2013 18:11, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> But have you tried both SITE and LOCSITE, with identical arguments,
>> in the same transaction?
>
>Yes.
>
>> Me, too. But have you tried EBCDIC; MODE B?
>
>Yes.
>
The evidence implies that commands are translated from EBCDIC to
ASCII at the client and from ASCII to EBCDIC at the server using
the default code pages ate the respective sites, and SBDATACONN
is applied only to the data content. Sounds like material for a PMR.
Any affirmative resolution could avoid incompatibility only by
introducing a new option.
It might be interesting, though minimally useful, to experiment
with an ASCII client and z/OS server to test what ASCII character
strings are translated to valid EBCDIC data set names. What's the
CP 285 grapheme for the code point 0x5B ('$', perhaps)?
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
